Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104905 

authority, and evolving technology and 

learning methods. The FAA’s objective 

of modernizing part 141 is to increase 

safety and create a foundation for a 

more structured training environment to 

aid in the reduction of general aviation 

accidents and fatalities. 

Therefore, part 141 must be analyzed 

to determine how it can evolve with the 

changing aviation industry. Over the 

course of the project, the FAA is seeking 

engagement from the flight training 

industry through participation in public 

meetings and submitted comments. 

Collaboration within the industry is 

encouraged to stimulate the innovation 

of a modern part 141 that will serve the 

needs of current and future pilot 

schools, as well as provide a robust and 

safe training environment that instills 

the necessary knowledge, skills, critical 

thinking, and aeronautical decision 

making in its pilots to create a safer 

national airspace system. 

For more information about the Part 

141 Modernization Initiative, visit 

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/ 

headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afx/ 

afs/afs800/afs810/modernization_of_

part-141_initiative. 

Public Meeting 

The FAA will provide the project 

goals, overview, and plans to address 

the modernization of part 141 initiative 

at the introductory virtual public 

meeting on March 6, 2025. Throughout 

the project period, the FAA intends to 

have additional public meetings, which 

the FAA will announce in the Federal 

Register. 

The U.S. Department of 

Transportation is committed to 

providing equal access to this meeting 

for all participants. If you require an 

alternative version of files provided or 

alternative accommodations, such as 

sign language, interpretation, or other 

ancillary aids, please contact the Part 

141 Modernization Initiative Team, at 9- 

AFS-Modernization-Part141- 

Comments@faa.gov by February 20, 

2025. 

Comments Encouraged 

The FAA encourages the public to 

submit comments to 

www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FAA– 

2024–2531. Comments that the FAA 

would find helpful include validated 

data and reports, unique discussion 

topics or scenarios, and/or feedback 

specific to modernizing part 141. The 

public is encouraged to provide 

feedback regarding innovative ideas; 

methods; solutions; products; and/or 

services that have, or could have, a 

significant impact on pilot school 

training. We encourage you to submit 

comments electronically through the 

Federal E-Rulemaking Portal. If you 

submit your comments electronically, it 

is not necessary to also submit a hard 

copy. 

The submission of public comments 

is encouraged but not required for 

meeting participation. The FAA will 

consider public feedback to determine 

the need for future considerations to the 

CFR; however, because such comments 

would be submitted outside of a noticeand-comment rulemaking, there is no 

requirement for the FAA to respond to 

submitted comments. The FAA will 

review comments that are post-marked, 

or submitted electronically, on or before 

the comment closing date of March 21, 

2025. Comments made after the closing 

date may be reviewed as time and 

resources permit. 

Additional information and resources, 

including future schedule details, will 

be provided on the project website as 

they become available. Specific 

questions regarding the project can be 

emailed to 9-AFS-ModernizationPart141-Comments@faa.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

13, 2024. 

Everette C. Rochon, Jr., 

Manager, Training and Certification Group, 

General Aviation and Commercial Division, 

Office of Safety Standards, Flight Standards 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30250 Filed 12–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 461 

RIN 3084–AB71 

Trade Regulation Rule on 

Impersonation of Government and 

Businesses 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Initial notice of informal 

hearing; final notice of informal hearing; 

list of Hearing Participants; requests for 

submissions from Hearing Participants. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade 

Commission (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) 

published a supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (‘‘SNPRM’’) in the 

Federal Register on March 1, 2024, 

titled ‘‘Trade Regulation Rule on 

Impersonation of Government and 

Businesses’’ (‘‘Rule’’), which requested 

additional public comment on whether 

the Commission should revise the title 

of the Rule, add a prohibition on the 

impersonation of individuals, and 

extend liability for violations of the Rule 

to parties who provide goods and 

services with knowledge or reason to 

know that those goods or services will 

be used in impersonation schemes that 

violate the Rule. The SNPRM 

announced the opportunity for 

interested parties to present their 

positions orally at an informal hearing. 

Six commenters requested to participate 

at the informal hearing. The 

Commission has decided not to proceed 

with the SNPRM’s proposed means and 

instrumentalities provision at this time. 

The purpose of the informal hearing 

will be to address issues relating to the 

proposed prohibition on impersonating 

individuals. 

DATES: 

Hearing date: The informal hearing 

will be conducted virtually on January 

17, 2025, at 1 p.m. Eastern. 

Participation deadline: If you are a 

Hearing Participant and would like to 

submit your oral presentation in writing 

or file a supplementary documentary 

submission, you must do so on or before 

January 9, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Hearing Participants may 

submit their oral presentations in 

writing or file supplementary 

documentary submissions, online or on 

paper, by following the instructions in 

part IV of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section. Write 

‘‘Impersonation SNPRM, R207000’’ on 

your submission and send it 

electronically to electronicfilings@

ftc.gov, with a copy to OALJ@ftc.gov. If 

you prefer to file your submission on 

paper, mail it via overnight service to: 

Federal Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Stop H–144 (Annex I), 

Washington, DC 20580. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Harris, tharris1@ftc.gov, (202– 

326–3620), Claire Wack, cwack@ftc.gov, 

(202–326–2836), and Ryan McAuliffe, 

rmcauliffe@ftc.gov, (202–326–3044). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Following public comment on an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(‘‘ANPRM’’), 86 FR 72901 (Dec. 23, 

2021), the FTC published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’), 87 FR 

62741 (Oct. 17, 2022), entitled ‘‘Trade 

Regulation Rule on Impersonation of 

Government and Business’’ (‘‘Rule’’), in 

the Federal Register, proposing to add 

part 461 to title 16 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations, chapter I, to 

prohibit the impersonation of 

government, businesses, or their 

officers. On March 30, 2023, the 

Commission published an initial notice 

of informal hearing, 88 FR 19024, and 

on May 4, 2023, Chief Administrative 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
104906 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1See SNPRM, 89 FR 15072 (Mar. 1, 2024), https:// 

www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/03/01/ 

2024-03793/trade-regulation-rule-onimpersonation-of-government-and-businesses. 

2 16 CFR 1.11(e). 

3 16 CFR 1.11(e)(1) through (3). 

4The Abundance Institute describes itself as ‘‘a 

mission-driven non-profit dedicated to creating the 

policy and cultural environment where emerging 

technologies can develop and thrive in order to 

perpetually expand widespread human prosperity.’’ 

Abundance Institute Cmt. at 1. 

5Andreesen Horowitz of a16z states that a16z is 

the ‘‘world’s largest venture capital firm’’ and a 

‘‘leading investor’’ in generative artificial 

intelligence (‘‘AI’’) ‘‘with a wide-ranging portfolio 

of companies’’ and the belief that AI ‘‘should be 

able to do a better job than unaided human 

intelligence in solving the complex challenges 

facing humanity, thereby creating a better world.’’ 

a16z Cmt. at 1–2. 

6CTA states that it is the largest technology trade 

association in North America, whose members 

range from startups to established brands. CTA Cmt. 

at 1. 

7SIIA states that it is a trade organization made 

up of companies engaged in the information 

economy, ‘‘including digital content providers and 

users in academic publishing, education technology 

companies, software developers, cloud service 

providers, financial information firms, and 

companies that host platforms used by billions of 

people worldwide.’’ SIIA Cmt. at 1. 

8TechFreedom states that it is a ‘‘nonprofit, 

nonpartisan think tank . . . dedicated to promoting 

technological progress that improves the human 

condition.’’ TechFreedom Cmt. at 1. 

9TechNet describes itself as ‘‘the national, 

bipartisan network of technology CEOs and senior 

executives that promotes the growth of the 

innovation economy by advocating a targeted policy 

agenda at the federal and 50-state level.’’ TechNet 

Cmt. at 1. 

10This comment was ‘‘submitted by the following 

consumer and privacy advocacy organizations: 

Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), 

National Consumer Law Center on behalf of its lowincome clients, Consumer Federation of America, 

National Consumers League, Consumer Action, and 

National Association of Consumer Advocates.’’ 

EPIC, et al. Cmt. at 2. 

11NCTA states that it is ‘‘the principal trade 

association for the U.S. cable industry, representing 

cable operators serving nearly 90% of the nation’s 

cable television households and cable program 

networks.’’ NCTA Cmt. at 1. 

12TINA describes itself as ‘‘a nonpartisan, 

nonprofit consumer advocacy organization whose 

mission is to combat deceptive advertising and 

consumer fraud; promote understanding of the 

serious harms commercial dishonesty inflicts; and 

work with consumers, businesses, independent 

experts, synergy organizations, self-regulatory 

bodies and government agencies to advance 

countermeasures that effectively prevent and stop 

deception in our economy.’’ TINA Cmt. at 2. 

13 16 CFR 1.12(a)(5) requires the initial notice of 

informal hearing to include a ‘‘list of the groups of 

interested persons determined by the Commission 

to have the same or similar interests in the 

proceeding.’’ 16 CFR 1.12(d) explains that the 

Commission ‘‘will, if appropriate, identify groups of 

interested persons with the same or similar interests 

in the proceeding.’’ Doing so facilitates the 

Commission’s ability to ‘‘require any group of 

interested persons with the same or similar interests 

in the proceeding to select a single representative 

to conduct cross-examination on behalf of the 

group.’’ Id. 

14See 16 CFR 1.12(a)(3); 15 U.S.C. 57a(c)(2)(B); 

see also 89 FR 15072 (Mar. 1, 2024). 

15 16 CFR 1.13(b)(1)(i) (issues that ‘‘must’’ be 

considered for cross-examination or rebuttal are 

only those disputed issues of fact the Commission 

determines to be ‘‘material’’ and ‘‘necessary to 

resolve’’). 

Law Judge Michael Chappell presided 

over the informal hearing, which was 

viewable live to the public from the 

Commission’s website, https://

www.ftc.gov. Based upon the comments 

submitted regarding the proposed 

provision imposing means and 

instrumentalities liability,1 the 

Commission decided that this provision 

warranted further analysis and 

consideration, and stated that it would 

continue to consider the issue, 

including soliciting additional 

comment. 

On March 1, 2024, the Commission 

published its final Rule in the Federal 

Register, 89 FR 15017. In that same 

issue of the Federal Register, the 

Commission also published the SNPRM, 

89 FR 15072, requesting additional 

public comment on whether the 

Commission should revise the title of 

the Rule, add a prohibition on the 

impersonation of individuals, and 

extend liability for violations of the Rule 

to parties who provide goods and 

services with knowledge or reason to 

know that those goods or services will 

be used in impersonation schemes that 

violate the Rule. 

In accordance with section 18(b)(1) of 

the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a(b)(1), which 

requires the Commission to provide the 

opportunity for an informal hearing in 

section 18 rulemaking proceedings, the 

SNPRM also announced the opportunity 

for interested persons to present their 

positions orally at an informal hearing. 

Six of the commenters requested the 

opportunity to present their position 

orally or participate at an informal 

hearing. Three additional commenters 

requested the opportunity to participate 

in a hearing if one were held but did not 

request a hearing themselves. 

After further consideration, the 

Commission has decided not to proceed 

with the SNPRM’s proposed means and 

instrumentalities provision (proposed 

§ 461.5) at this time. Therefore, the 

purpose of the informal hearing will be 

to address issues relating to the 

proposed prohibition on impersonating 

individuals (proposed § 461.4). 

II. The Requests for an Informal 

Hearing; Presentation of Oral 

Submissions 

Section 18 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 

57a, as implemented by the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 

1.11(e), provides interested persons 

with the opportunity to present their 

positions orally at an informal hearing 

upon request.2 To make such a request, 

a commenter must submit, no later than 

the close of the comment period for the 

SNPRM, (1) a request to make an oral 

submission, if desired; (2) a statement 

identifying the interested person’s 

interests in the proceeding; and (3) any 

proposal to add disputed issues of 

material fact to be addressed at the 

hearing.3

The following six commenters 

requested an informal hearing generally 

in accordance with the requirements of 

16 CFR 1.11(e): 

1. The Abundance Institute; 4

2. Andreesen Horowitz (a16z); 5

3. The Consumer Technology 

Association (CTA); 6

4. Software & Information Industry 

Association (SIIA); 7

5. TechFreedom; 8 and 

6. TechNet.9

In addition, while the following 

commenters stated that an informal 

hearing was not necessary, they 

requested the opportunity to make an 

oral presentation if the Commission 

holds an informal hearing at others’ 

request: 

1. Electronic Privacy Information 

Center (EPIC), et al.; 10

2. The Internet & Television 

Association (NCTA); 11 and 

3. Truth in Advertising (TINA).12

The Commission finds that the 

requests submitted were generally 

adequate and therefore will hold an 

informal hearing. The nine commenters 

listed will have the opportunity to make 

oral presentations during the informal 

hearing. The Commission does not find 

it necessary to identify any group of 

interested persons with the same or 

similar interest in the proceeding.13

III. Disputed Issues of Material Fact; 

Final Notice 

In the SNPRM, the Commission did 

not identify any disputed issues of 

material fact that needed to be resolved 

at an informal hearing. However, the 

Commission may still do so in this 

initial and final notice of informal 

hearing, either on its own initiative or 

in response to a persuasive showing 

from a commenter.14 To be appropriate 

for cross-examination or rebuttal, a 

disputed issue of material fact must 

raise ‘‘specific facts’’ that are ‘‘necessary 

to be resolved.’’ 15

In response to the SNPRM, six 

commenters proposed disputed issues 

of material fact related to proposed 

§ 461.5 (Means and Instrumentalities: 

Provision of Goods or Services for 

Unlawful Impersonation Prohibited) 

regarding extending liability to parties 

who provide goods or services with 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104907 

16The Abundance Institute Cmt. at 15. 

17CTA Cmt. at 11–12. CTA additionally 

requested to cross examine witnesses pursuant to 

15 U.S.C. 57a(c)(2)(B) as to these proposed disputed 

issues of material fact. 

18See SIIA Cmt. at 7. Although it mentions 

generally the estimate of potential costs of the 

‘‘proposed rule,’’ the Commission understands the 

substance of this proposed disputed issue of 

material fact to concern the estimated costs 

specifically associated with proposed § 461.5 

because SIIA stated in its comment that it 

recommends adoption of the other proposed 

amendments regarding individual impersonation. 

Id. at 1 (‘‘SIIA supports the Commission’s proposed 

extension of the impersonation rule to 

individuals.’’). 

19 a16z Cmt. at 20 (quoting SNPRM, 89 FR 15078). 

The Commission does not understand a16z’s 

proposed disputed issue of material fact regarding 

the quoted portion of this paragraph to concern 

proposed § 461.4. Like SIIA, ‘‘a16z supports 

expanding the Impersonation Rule’s scope to 

impersonations of individuals.’’ Id. at 2. 

20 Id. at 20–21. 

21TechFreedom Cmt. at 2–3. 

22 If any interested person seeks to have 

additional disputed issues of material fact 

designated, the person may make such request to 

the presiding officer pursuant to 16 CFR 

1.13(b)(1)(ii). 

23 16 CFR 1.12(b). 

24 16 CFR 1.12(c). 

25 Id. 

knowledge or reason to know that they 

will be used in impersonation schemes. 

The Abundance Institute claimed in 

its comment: ‘‘The record contains 

reports of business practices described 

as ‘means and instrumentalities’ 

violations. But none of the reports 

identify even a single incident (let alone 

a ‘prevalent’ practice) of a party 

‘pass[ing] on a false or misleading 

representation’ as is necessary to meet 

the first prong of the two-prong test for 

M&I violations of Section 5.’’ 16

CTA proposed three disputed issues 

of material fact: 17

1. ‘‘Whether the Means and 

Instrumentalities Proposal imposes an 

affirmative obligation on companies to 

address the misuse of their products and 

services, and whether there are any 

costs associated with implementing 

compliance plans to satisfy this 

requirement.’’ 

2. ‘‘Whether the Means and 

Instrumentalities Proposal will chill the 

development of new products and 

services that could be misused by 

fraudsters.’’ 

3. ‘‘Whether the Means and 

Instrumentalities Proposal’s liability 

framework is responsive to the known 

trends and evidence of online fraud.’’ 

TechNet proposed two disputed 

issues of material fact: 

1. ‘‘Whether the means and 

instrumentalities provision imposes an 

affirmative obligation to address the 

misuse of tools, products, and services 

and the costs associated with such 

compliance programs.’’ 

2. ‘‘Whether the means and 

instrumentalities provision will chill 

the development and deployment of 

legitimate tools that can be 

misappropriated for impersonation.’’ 

SIIA proposed three disputed issues 

of material fact: 

1. ‘‘Whether the Commission has 

accurately estimated the costs 

associated with the proposed rule.’’ 18

2. ‘‘Whether the means and 

instrumentalities provision would 

impose an affirmative obligation on 

companies to address misuses of goods 

and services and, if so, costs associated 

with implementing additional 

compliance programs or efforts to 

address potential misuse.’’ 

3. ‘‘Whether the means and 

instrumentalities provision will impede 

the development of technologies that 

have positive societal benefits but could 

be misused to enable impersonation.’’ 

a16z quoted the following portion of 

a paragraph from the SNPRM, noting 

that it disputed ‘‘those material facts[:]’’ 

‘‘Because the deceptive impersonation 

of individuals is already prohibited by 

section 5 of the FTC Act, and section 5 

similarly makes unlawful providing the 

means and instrumentalities for a 

violation of section 5 of the Act, the 

SNPRM would not change the state of 

law in terms of what is legal and what 

is illegal. Furthermore, the proposed 

amendments to the Rule would impose 

no recordkeeping requirement and 

would not create or impose any 

compliance costs.’’ 19 Relatedly, it 

proposed as a disputed issue of material 

fact ‘‘the existence and magnitude’’ of 

‘‘direct and indirect harms’’ that the 

‘‘proposed constructive knowledge 

standard’’ in § 461.5 would, in a16z’s 

view, ‘‘inflict.’’ 20

TechFreedom proposed as disputed 

issues of material fact whether ‘‘the rule 

would apply to AI tools covered by 

Section 230’’ and ‘‘the applicability of a 

constructive knowledge standard’’ in 

proposed § 461.5.21

Each of these proposed disputed 

issues of material fact relates to the 

§ 461.5 proposal to extend liability to 

parties who provide goods or services 

with knowledge or reason to know that 

they will be used in impersonation 

schemes. After further consideration, 

the Commission has decided not to 

proceed with proposed § 461.5 at this 

time. It is therefore not necessary to 

address the proposed disputed issues 

concerning § 461.5, and the purpose of 

the informal hearing will be to address 

issues relating to proposed § 461.4’s 

prohibition on impersonating 

individuals. 

Thus, the Commission finds that there 

are no ‘‘disputed issues of material fact’’ 

to resolve at the informal hearing 22 and 

no need for cross-examination or 

rebuttal submissions.23

This initial notice of informal hearing 

also serves as the ‘‘final notice of 

informal hearing.’’ 24 A final notice of 

informal hearing is limited in its 

substance to matters that arise only 

when the Commission designates 

disputed issues of material fact: who 

will conduct cross-examination; 

whether any interested persons with 

similar interests will be grouped 

together for such purposes; and who 

will make rebuttal submissions.25

Because cross-examination and 

submissions of rebuttal evidence are not 

anticipated to occur in this informal 

hearing, no separate final notice of 

informal hearing is necessary. 

IV. List of Hearing Participants; Making 

an Oral Statement; Requests for 

Documentary Submissions 

Pursuant to Commission Rule 

§ 1.12(a)(4), 16 CFR 1.12(a)(4), the 

following is the list of interested 

persons (‘‘Hearing Participants’’) who 

will have the opportunity to make oral 

presentations at the informal hearing: 

1. The Abundance Institute; 

2. Andreesen Horowitz (a16z); 

3. The Consumer Technology 

Association (CTA); 

4. Software & Information Industry 

Association (SIIA); 

5. TechFreedom; 

6. TechNet; 

7. Electronic Privacy Information 

Center (EPIC) (et al.); 

8. The Internet & Television 

Association (NCTA); and 

9. Truth in Advertising (TINA). 

Because the Commission has decided 

not to proceed with proposed § 461.5, 

the purpose of the hearing will be to 

address issues relating to the remaining 

proposal to prohibit impersonation of 

individuals in § 461.4. Oral statements 

will be limited to 15 minutes, although 

they may be supplemented by 

documentary submissions, and the 

presiding officer may grant an extension 

of time for good cause shown. 

Transcripts of the oral statements will 

be placed in the rulemaking record. 

Hearing Participants will be provided 

with instructions as to how to 

participate in the virtual hearing. 

If you are a Hearing Participant and 

would like to submit your oral 

representation in writing or file a 

supplementary documentary 

submission, please write 

‘‘Impersonation SNPRM, R207000’’ on 

your submission and send it 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
104908 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

26See 16 CFR 1.13(d) (‘‘The presiding officer’s 

recommended decision will be limited to 

explaining the presiding officer’s proposed 

resolution of disputed issues of material fact.’’). 27See 15 U.S.C. 57a(i)(2)(A); 16 CFR 1.18(c). 

electronically to electronicfilings@

ftc.gov, with a copy to OALJ@ftc.gov. If 

you prefer to file your submission on 

paper, mail it by overnight service to: 

Federal Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Stop H–144 (Annex I), 

Washington, DC 20580. 

If you file a documentary submission 

under this section, your submission— 

including your name and your State— 

will be placed on the public record of 

this proceeding, including on the 

website https://www.ftc.gov. Because 

your documentary submission will be 

placed on the public record, you are 

responsible for making sure that it does 

not include any sensitive or confidential 

information. In particular, your 

submission should not contain sensitive 

personal information, such as your or 

anyone else’s Social Security number; 

date of birth; driver’s license number or 

other State identification number or 

foreign country equivalent: passport 

number; financial account number; or 

credit or debit card number. You are 

also solely responsible for making sure 

your documentary submission doesn’t 

include any sensitive health 

information, such as medical records or 

other individually identifiable health 

information. In addition, your 

documentary submission should not 

include any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any 

commercial or financial information 

which . . . is privileged or 

confidential’’—as provided in section 

6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

Commission Rule § 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 

4.10(a)(2)—including, in particular, 

competitively sensitive information 

such as costs, sales statistics, 

inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, 

manufacturing processes, or customer 

names. 

Documentary submissions containing 

material for which confidential 

treatment is requested must be filed in 

paper form, must be clearly labeled 

‘‘Confidential,’’ and must comply with 

Commission Rule § 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). 

In particular, the written request for 

confidential treatment that accompanies 

the submission must include the factual 

and legal basis for the confidentiality 

request and must identify the specific 

portions to be withheld from the public 

record. See Commission Rule § 4.9(c). 

Your documentary submission will be 

kept confidential only if the General 

Counsel grants your request in 

accordance with the law and the public 

interest. Once your documentary 

submission has been posted publicly at 

https://www.ftc.gov—as legally required 

by Commission Rule § 4.9(b), 16 CFR 

4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove it, 

unless you submit a confidentiality 

request that meets the requirements for 

such treatment under Commission Rule 

§ 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c), and the General 

Counsel grants that request. 

Visit the FTC website to read this 

document and the news release 

describing it. The FTC Act and other 

laws that the Commission administers 

permit the collection of submissions to 

consider and use in this proceeding as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

documentary submissions it receives 

from the Hearing Participants on or 

before January 9, 2025. For information 

on the Commission’s privacy policy, 

including routine uses permitted by the 

Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/ 

site-information/privacy-policy. 

Hearing Participants who need 

assistance should indicate as much in 

their submissions, and the Commission 

will endeavor to provide 

accommodations. Hearing Participants 

without the computer technology 

necessary to participate in video 

conferencing will be able to participate 

in the informal hearing by telephone; 

they should indicate as much in their 

submissions. 

V. Conduct of the Informal Hearing; 

Role of Presiding Officer 

The Commission’s Chief Presiding 

Officer, the Chair, has appointed and 

designates Administrative Law Judge for 

the Federal Trade Commission, the 

Honorable Jay L. Himes, to serve as the 

presiding officer of the informal hearing. 

Judge Himes will conduct the informal 

hearing virtually using video 

conferencing starting at 1 p.m. Eastern 

on January 17, 2025. The informal 

hearing will be available for the public 

to watch live from the Commission’s 

website, https://www.ftc.gov, and a 

recording or transcript of the informal 

hearing will be placed in the rulemaking 

record. 

Because there are no ‘‘disputed issues 

of material fact’’ to resolve at the 

informal hearing, the presiding officer is 

not anticipated to make a recommended 

decision.26 The role of the presiding 

officer shall include presiding over and 

ensuring the orderly conduct of the 

informal hearing, including selecting 

the sequence in which oral statements 

will be heard, and placing the transcript 

and any additional written submissions 

received into the rulemaking record. 

The presiding officer may prescribe 

additional procedures or issue rulings in 

accordance with Commission Rule 

§ 1.13, 16 CFR 1.13. In execution of the 

presiding officer’s obligations and 

responsibilities under the Commission 

Rules, the presiding officer may issue 

additional public notices. 

VI. Communications by Outside Parties 

to the Commissioners or Their Advisors 

Pursuant to Commission Rule 

§ 1.18(c)(1), 16 CFR 1.18(c)(1), the 

Commission has determined that 

communications with respect to the 

merits of this proceeding from any 

outside party to any Commissioner or 

Commissioner advisor shall be subject 

to the following treatment. Written 

communications and summaries or 

transcripts of oral communications shall 

be placed on the rulemaking record if 

the communication is received before 

the participation deadline. They shall be 

placed on the public record if the 

communication is received later. Unless 

the outside party making an oral 

communication is a Member of 

Congress, such communications are 

permitted only if advance notice is 

published in the Weekly Calendar and 

Notice of ‘‘Sunshine’’ Meetings.27

By direction of the Commission. 

April J. Tabor, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30718 Filed 12–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 172 

[Docket No. FDA–2024–F–5640] 

Monterey Mushrooms, LLC; Filing of 

Food Additive Petition 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notification of petition. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or we) is 

announcing that we have filed a 

petition, submitted by Monterey 

Mushrooms, LLC, proposing that the 

food additive regulations for vitamin D2

mushroom powder be amended to 

provide for an additional method for 

producing the additive. 

DATES: The food additive petition was 

filed on December 11, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to https://

www.regulations.gov and insert the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1